Wheaton Denies Seeking Resignation of Former Lesbian Employee Who Believes It’s ‘Good to Be Gay’

WHEATON, Ill. — Officials at Wheaton College, who have been in headlines in recent months surrounding controversy over a professor who claimed that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, are now denying that they sought the resignation of a former lesbian employee who says she was forced out over her views that it is “good” to identify as homosexual.

As previously reported, the Wheaton group “Refuge” was formed to provide “a biblically faithful community” for students who believe they are homosexual, and was approved by administration in 2013.

Refuge was founded by Justin Massey, an openly homosexual political science student who, according to reports, desired to also lay the groundwork for a “gay-straight alliance club” at Wheaton. Massey describes himself as a “gay Christian” and says his sexual identity is not only compatible with his faith, but “absolutely critical.”

In mid-2014, about a year after Massey formed the group, Wheaton administrators reorganized Refuge from a student-led organization to a staff-led community club. Dr. Paul Chelsen, Vice President for Student Development at Wheaton, told Christian News Network that Refuge was originally intended to be “a supportive community that holds to the biblical perspective on sexuality outlined in our Community Covenant.”

Following the re-organization of the group, Wheaton Chaplain’s Office hired blogger Julie Rodgers, who identifies herself as a “celibate gay Christian,” to lead Refuge as student counselor.

Wheaton President Philip Ryken, formerly the pastor of Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, however, told World Magazine that students and faculty must “be clear that they do not advocate homosexual practice or find their identity in their sexuality.”

“Same-sex orientation is not good in and of itself, but is part of the brokenness of a fallen world,” he said.

In an article written for Time Magazine on Tuesday, Rodgers stated that she and Ryken–as well as Wheaton Provost Stan Jones—clashed on this subject.

“Even though they had known I referred to myself as ‘gay’ prior to hiring me, they encouraged me not to refer to myself as gay any longer,” she wrote. “They asked me to say I was simply a Christian who experienced same-sex attraction, one who was open to the Lord healing me in ways that could lead to a holy marriage with a man.”

“The problem was that I didn’t think I needed to be healed—I had been clear about that before I was hired. I had finally come to believe it was good to be gay, that God actually delights in those of us who are gay.” Rodgers continued. “Wheaton’s administration had always pushed back against my attempt to create a positive narrative around being gay rather than one of ‘brokenness’ and the need for healing.”

She said that she sought to work out matters with the school and, for fear of losing her job, withheld an article she had written for Christianity Today portraying homosexuality in a positive light and urging “the Church to celebrate the presence of LGBT people.” But she allegedly was called into Ryken’s office in January 2015, at which time her resignation was suggested.

“If they couldn’t support someone committed to celibacy—someone who abided by their Community Covenant alongside every straight employee—I could only conclude that their anxiety wasn’t about my sex life. Their anxiety was about my existence,” Rodgers wrote.

Therefore, she explained, “I resigned from Wheaton during the summer of 2015 and began publicly advocating for same-sex marriage in the church.”

Now, Wheaton is denying that Rodgers was ever asked to resign, and says that officials were surprised that she decided to leave.

“Early in her time at Wheaton, it became clear that Ms. Rodgers did not fully realize the extent to which some conflated her public statements and the college’s views. For that reason, college administrators encouraged her to learn the college community so that she would understand the impact of her writing, speaking and social media activity,” Wheaton wrote in a statement in response to Rodger’s Time Magazine article.

“They asked that in referring to herself as gay, Ms. Rodgers also be clear about her moral commitments related to the Community Covenant,” it clarified.

The school said that Rodgers’ decision to leave Wheaton was completely voluntary.

“Ms. Rodgers’ resignation came as a surprise to President Ryken and to the college community generally,” the statement continued. “She was not asked, encouraged, or pressured to resign. Her communication of her resignation followed the publication of a blog post that announced a significant change in her views on integrating Christian beliefs and same-sex issues.”

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Striving to bring you the news without compromise and with Christ in focus, we press on despite recent changes in Facebook and Google's algorithms, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational site revenue. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News Network supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed?May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Commenting Guidelines: We welcome readers to comment on stories, but we will not tolerate remarks containing profanity, vulgarity, violence, blasphemy, all caps or any discourteous behavior. Thank you for your cooperation in maintaining a respectful public environment where readers can engage in reasonable discussion about matters affecting our nation and our world.Read More →

This passage says nothing about homosexuality and yes God said in both Testaments it is a sin.

David & Jonathan

Explain to me one thing please. In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that a having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

And we both know that God NEVER changes His mind on what is and what is not sin.

DrewTwoFish

Sure looks like it from where I sit.

Paige Turner

STOP SHOUTING. Its giving me a headache.

David & Jonathan

Factually wrong:

Explain to me one thing. In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that a having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT. What is the context of both Leviticus 18 and 20? Molek worshipping. The first verses of Leviticus 20 start with a whole story about Molek worshipping, and the verse about perceived homosexuality in Leviticus 18 is about Molek worshipping. Another clear indication about context is the use of the word Toevah in the hebrew text (semi translated to abomination in your bible). Toevah is only used in an idolatrous context. A bit of explanation on Molek worshipping: it was all about fertility rites. Temple prostitution and sex orgies where men and women had sex with everything on 2 and 4 legs. Molek worshipping -> Idolatry.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

And just as having sex with a woman during her period outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 is not a sin, is sex between two man outside the context of Leviticus 18 and 20 not a sin. Simply because it is not a violation of the two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Obviously is Molek worshipping against the commandment Love God. Other sexual sins in Leviticus 18 and 20 are also outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 sinful as they are a violation of the Love your Neighbor commandment. But again, homosexuality is not one of them.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

And lets have a close look at Romans 1 as well:

First of all, Romans 1 is only an introduction to Romans 2. Paul is nicely sweeping up his public to make his point in Romans 2:

2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

And why don’t you read the preceding verses?

Lets start with verse 23:

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Only then we come to your favorite part…

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did EXCHANGE THEIR natural use into that which is against THEIR nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving THEIR natural use of the woman, BURNED in their lust one toward another;

Within the context of adultery we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs. What needs to happen for you yourself as a straight man to burn in lust for another man? That is quite something don’t you think?

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

Actually no, it’s a matter of geography. If you had been born in Saudi Arabia, your little book would be the Qu’ran and you would be speaking on its behalf instead. And you’d be calling it the Holy Word of Allah.

Actually no. You are wrong. Nothing is above of or predates God and His Holy Word. The false religion worshiping the false god allah did not come into being until 650 A.D. and to this day there are still millions of Christians in that part of the world. There is only one true living God and He is Jehovah.

Quantz

Right. All religions are wrong but you magically chose the right one. Out of over 30,000. Amazing!

I am free of the dietary and ceremonial laws of the Old Covenant because I accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior.

Paige Turner

So you have an exemption from the bits you don’t like.
How very convenient.
I thought the bible was the holy word of god. So now, only the bits that you like are.

Quantz

I think you’re using logic and reason on people who are commanded by their little book of superstition NOT to use logic and reason. I’m truly appreciative of your efforts though, even though it will never penetrate such thoroughly indoctrinated skulls.

David & Jonathan

Thanks for your post. What my reasoning exposes is that these people don’t want to know the truth, as that would mean giving up on their justification for their prejudice. They are not interested in what God really said or Jesus really said if that doesn’t fit their narrative.

Quantz

This is hate masquerading as Christianity, it’s a problem rampant in the evangelical movement.

He did not.
There is no passage in the bible that says homosexuality is a sin. Not in the old testament, not in the new testament.
You believe in a human construct, invented by the Roman Catholic church in 390 after Christ, as one of their tactics to win from the Arians, which were especially trusted by the emperors (constantine for example) because of their homosexuality.

DALALLGOO

No sir. You are the one who is advocating the human construct of evolution of the sexes. God made man and God made woman. Homosexuals are now presented by you as another evolved kind. This is worship of the creature over the Creator and is the very essence of sin and the breaking of the first commandment. Also when you engage in the acts of sex with your same sex partner this is a breaking of the fifth commandment.

David & Jonathan

I am not worshipping any creature. I am just following God’s and Jesus’s word.
Don’t you know that Jesus himself gave the exemption for a man to marry a woman if he is born Gay? Read your bible…

And how would a same sex relationship be against honoring your father and your mother?

Matthew 19:11-12New King James Version (NKJV)
Jesus Teaches on Celibacy
11 But He said to them, “All cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given: 12 For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their
mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and
there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of
heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”
=================

This has ZERO to do with same sex sex aka homosexuality.

David & Jonathan

This has all to do with homosexuality…. Look at the last category. Eunuchs that made themselves Eunuch for the kingdom of heaven. Men without a penis were not allowed into the temple. Cutting your penis of for the kingdom of heaven doesn’t sound a very good idea then don’t you think? The last category talks about celibates. This already implies that the word Eunuch has a much wider meaning than your current day dictionary.

Lets look at Jesus his “dictionary”, the Roman Law of that time and the Talmud, a key part of Jesus his religion:

Both the Talmud and Roman Law of that time are pretty clear about what an Eunuch is.

Both are very specific on the subject on born eunuchs and the difference with man made eunuchs. Born eunuchs could still technically procreate and the “condition” was understood to be mental, and not physical.

This is all very well documented and verifiable. Below you find all references to the proof. You can search the references yourself and see it for your own eyes.

But I assume you won’t, because it doesn’t fit your storyline. That is what the gospel is for you. Selective shopping to defend your own prejudice. Let me not be judgmental. May God have mercy on your soul. You clearly need it.

Based on Jesus his definition I am a born eunuch. Current day definition is obviously different.

Born Eunuch from mothers womb – technically still capable of procreation, but lacking the lust for women (seen as a mental “condition” in both Roman law and talmud.

Man made Eunuchs – castrates

Eunuchs that made themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven – celibates

Roman Law:

There was a kind of “lemon law” for slaves in the Roman empire — just as in modern times used car dealers may be prohibited from concealing major flaws in cars, Roman slave dealers were prohibited from concealing serious flaws in slaves that they offered for sale. The purpose of the rulings in Book 21 Title 1 of the Digest was to determine what kinds of flaws would give rise to the rescission of a purchase contract if the seller had not reported them before the sale.

Minor flaws, such as long-ago healed wounds or stuttering speech, were called defects and did not require disclosure. Relevant flaws, such as blindness or tuberculosis, were called diseases. The jurist Sabinus defined disease in this context as “an unnatural physical condition whereby the usefulness of the body is impaired for the purposes for which nature endowed us with bodily health.”

Ulpian declares that “if there be any defect or disease which impairs the usefulness and serviceability of the slave, that is a ground for rescission; we must, however, bear in mind that a very minor flaw will not lead to his being held defective or diseased. Thus a slight fever, or an old recurrent fever which can now be ignored, or a trivial wound, will entail no liability if it be not declared; such things can be treated as beneath notice.”

Vivian says “that we should still regard as healthy those with minor mental defects,” otherwise the health of a slave could be denied “without limit, for instance, because he is frivolous, superstitious, quick-tempered, obstinate or has some other flaw of mind.”

Ulpian ultimately stipulates that “generally, the rule which we appear to observe is that the expression ‘defect and disease’ applies only to the body … All in all, if the defect be one of the mind alone, there will be no rescission, unless the vendor has stated that such defect does not exist when, in fact, it does … if the defect is wholly physical or a combination of the physical and nonphysical, there is scope for rescission.”

Paulus says (D 21.1.5): “Just as there is a distinction between those defects which the Greeks describe as a malignancy, and those they categorize as misfortunes, maladies, or weaknesses, so there is a distinction between such [lesser] defects and that form of disease whereby the usability of a slave is reduced.”

So we see, the principle is that a slave is diseased for the purposes of the law if he has a bodily flaw which diminishes his usability, which for a slave means his ability to perform certain functions that may be of value to his owner.

Now we come to the point that interests us today. The law finds that eunuchs did not have an incapacitating bodily flaw.

Ulpian says (D 21.1.6.2): “To me it appears the better view that a eunuch is not diseased or defective, but healthy, just like a man who has one testicle, who is also able to procreate.”

Therefore Ulpian is saying that the usefulness, or capability, of a eunuch is not destroyed by his being a eunuch: he is able to procreate. How can this be, we ask today? Eunuchs, as we all know, are made unable to procreate by their emasculation!

Paulus (D 21.1.7) clarifies: “If, on the other hand, someone is a eunuch in such a way that he is missing a necessary part of his body, even internally, then he is diseased.”

So the reproductive ability of the unqualified form of eunuch is not destroyed because he is not missing any necessary parts of his body. If it were impossible for a eunuch to produce a child because of a bodily characteristic, even a naturally-occurring one like an anatomical birth defect, then that would clearly constitute a disease under this section. But Ulpian says a eunuch is not diseased, but healthy. Apparently, eunuch status must be an issue of the mind, featuring no disabling anatomical defect and therefore having no legally relevant consequences. By the way, I have never seen this section of the Digest cited in any article or book about eunuchs. I found it by looking up spado in a concordance to the Corpus Juris Civilis.

To recap, the distinction for Ulpian and Paulus is between a eunuch whose capability to procreate is destroyed because he is missing necessary parts of his body, and an anatomically whole eunuch for whom procreation may be psychologically difficult, but is biologically unimpeded.

And from the Talmud:

Natural Eunuchs in the Talmud: Never Fit, But Possibly Curable

Like the Roman law, the Talmud also distinguished with clear legal consequences between natural and man-made eunuchs. In Yebamoth, Chapter 8 (folio 79b), Rabbi Joshua posed a question about a contradiction he had encountered in the law.

According to the Bible (Deuteronomy 25:5-10), when a man dies childless, it is his brother’s responsibility to marry the widow and engender a child in his brother’s name. Any man who refuses to give his deceased brother a child in this way is disgraced and must submit to a humiliating public ceremony called “chalitsah” in which the widow removes one of his shoes and spits in his face. From then on the reluctant brother’s family is known as “the house of him who had his shoe loosed” [beit chalu’ hanna’al].

The legal problem puzzling Rabbi Joshua was this: “I have heard that a eunuch submits to chalitsah and that chalitsah is arranged for his wife, and also that a eunuch does not submit to chalitsah and that no chalitsah is arranged for his wife, and I am unable to explain this.” The text continues with two conflicting explanations by the Tannaim.

Rabbi Akibah said: “I will explain it: A man-made eunuch submits to chalitsah and chalitsah is also arranged for his wife, because there was a time when he was in a state of fitness. A eunuch-by-nature neither submits to chalitsah nor is chalitsah arranged for his wife, since there never was a time when he was fit.”

The opposing view was given by Rabbi Eliezer, who said: “Not so, but a eunuch-by-nature submits to chalitsah and chalitsah is also arranged for his wife, because he may be cured. A man-made eunuch neither submits to chalitsah nor is chalitsah arranged for his wife, since he cannot be cured.”

The text goes on: “Rabbi Joshua ben Bathyra testified concerning Ben Megosath, who was a man-made eunuch living in Jerusalem, that his wife was allowed to be married by the levir, thus confirming the opinion of Rabbi Akibah. The eunuch neither submits to chalitsah nor contracts the levirate

…14″Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. 15″Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. (matthew 10)

“[Jesus said] For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
Matthew 19:12

Using your logic, Jesus was saying there are some homosexuals who were born that way, some who were made homosexual of men, or some who made themselves a homosexual.

If you try to pretend it means to choose to live in celibacy, a person is not “born from the mother’s womb choosing to live in celibacy”, which again shows how you’re simply being dishonest.

Not to mention more logic that refutes your false claim: Jesus is not going to say that it’s good to do something that instead elsewhere God says it’s a sin. He’s not going to say “A person committed a bad life-long sin for the kingdom of Heaven’s sake”. And you’re not choosing to be celibate if it’s “you’re made celibate of men” as part of that verse says.

Even if a person didn’t know the word meant “castrated”, reading the verse makes it clear it CAN’T be “homosexual” or “choosing to be celibate”.

You can try to twist scripture all you want, but it’s God you’ll have to convince that he approves of homosexuality, not men, as you’re bearing false witness of what God says and will answer to the deception you spread that God is just fine with homosexuality. I suggest you stop.

David & Jonathan

You are not the smartest kid on the block are you?

“He’s talking about a brotherly love for your neighbor, not a homosexual love for your neighbor.”

When it comes to the commandment “love your neighbor” it of course does not necessarily mean that this would be homosexual love for your neighbor. The point is that it does not exclude homosexual love, as homosexual love (as in a loving and caring, monogamous relationship) does not hurt the neighbor.

You clearly did not understand my logic regarding Eunuchs. Eunuchs was a much wider term than your definition. The literal translation was “keeper of the bed”, a very trusted position. It were men that could not or did not want to procreate.

It included castrated males (man made eunuchs), homosexuals (born eunuchs) and eunuchs that made themselves eunuch for the kingdom of heaven (celibates).

So what jesus says is: “because there are homosexuals, castrates and celibates”. Nothing non-logical with that.

To continue with your post:
“Not to mention more logic that refutes your false claim: Jesus is not going to say that it’s good to do something that instead elsewhere God says it’s a sin. ”

This is a classic example of a circle reasoning. Sorry to pop your bubble, but God nowhere states that homosexuality is a sin. Give me any verse that you think it might condemn homosexuality and I will provide you with all biblical proof that it is not the case.

Again, to continue with your post:
Even if a person didn’t know the word meant “castrated”, reading the verse makes it clear it CAN’T be “homosexual” or “choosing to be celibate”.

Not clear at all.

You have to work a bit on your logical reading and reasoning before you make any sense..

I am not a liar at all, because that would mean that the gospel is lying.

Explain to me one thing. In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that a having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT. What is the context of both Leviticus 18 and 20? Molek worshipping. The first verses of Leviticus 20 start with a whole story about Molek worshipping, and the verse about perceived homosexuality in Leviticus 18 is followed by one about Molek worshipping. Another clear indication about context is the use of the word Toevah in the hebrew text (semi translated to abomination in your bible). Toevah is only used in an idolatrous context. A bit of explanation on Molek worshipping: it was all about fertility rites. Temple prostitution and sex orgies where men and women had sex with everything on 2 and 4 legs. Molek worshipping -> Idolatry.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

And just as having sex with a woman during her period outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 is not a sin, is sex between two man outside the context of Leviticus 18 and 20 not a sin. Simply because it is not a violation of the two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Obviously is Molek worshipping against the commandment Love God. Other sexual sins in Leviticus 18 and 20 are also outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 sinful as they are a violation of the Love your Neighbor commandment. But again, homosexuality is not one of them.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

And lets have a close look at Romans 1 as well:

First of all, Romans 1 is only an introduction to Romans 2. Paul is nicely sweeping up his public to make his point in Romans 2:

2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

And why don’t you read the preceding verses?

Lets start with verse 23:

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Only then we come to your favorite part…

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did EXCHANGE THEIR natural use into that which is against THEIR nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving THEIR natural use of the woman, BURNED in their lust one toward another;

Within the context of adultery we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs. What needs to happen for you yourself as a straight man to burn in lust for another man? That is quite something don’t you think?

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

I did not think you would understand what I said. You don’t do you? Because you doge the statement entirely and then change the subject to something you are familiar arguing. Here again is what I am telling you your sin is.
The Man is complete with the woman is what God stated in the act of creating a woman for the man. God made his creation perfect at that time and a man and a woman is the creation model for all sexual unions. Male and female is the representation thru-out scripture since that creation. Your using evolutionary principles to change that by teaching that men with men is an act of God (ie that the homosexual is a new kind of human) and in doing so have changed the word of God to worship yourself as a new creature. Now you worship yourself first and God second.
Secondly men with men cannot procreate any offspring and in so acting that out sexually you are dishonoring your mother and father.

Explain to me one thing. In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that a having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT. What is the context of both Leviticus 18 and 20? Molek worshipping. The first verses of Leviticus 20 start with a whole story about Molek worshipping, and the verse about perceived homosexuality in Leviticus 18 is about Molek worshipping. Another clear indication about context is the use of the word Toevah in the hebrew text (semi translated to abomination in your bible). Toevah is only used in an idolatrous context. A bit of explanation on Molek worshipping: it was all about fertility rites. Temple prostitution and sex orgies where men and women had sex with everything on 2 and 4 legs. Molek worshipping -> Idolatry.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.
And just as having sex with a woman during her period outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 is not a sin, is sex between two man outside the context of Leviticus 18 and 20 not a sin. Simply because it is not a violation of the two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Obviously is Molek worshipping against the commandment Love God. Other sexual sins in Leviticus 18 and 20 are also outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 sinful as they are a violation of the Love your Neighbor commandment. But again, homosexuality is not one of them.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

And lets have a close look at Romans 1 as well:

First of all, Romans 1 is only an introduction to Romans 2. Paul is nicely sweeping up his public to make his point in Romans 2:

2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

And why don’t you read the preceding verses?

Lets start with verse 23:

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Only then we come to your favorite part…

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did EXCHANGE THEIR natural use into that which is against THEIR nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving THEIR natural use of the woman, BURNED in their lust one toward another;

Within the context of adultery we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs. What needs to happen for you yourself as a straight man to burn in lust for another man? That is quite something don’t you think?

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

If that is your defense, then you have lost. Because God’s holy word indeed explains that homosexuality is not a sin. He even gives plenty of examples of same sex relationships: David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and …., the Roman soldier and his toy boy, Jesus and his “beloved disciple” that runs away naked at Jesus’s arrest.

I have not lost anything and have already gained everything and you can also by surrendering your life to God through His Son Christ Jesus by being born again as Jesus tells us in John 3.

David & Jonathan

You did not answer the question:

Explain to me, how can you deduce from the two constitutional commandments that homosexuality is a siN?

FoJC_Forever

You preach the Lie which Jezebel the false prophetess preached. You are condemned with her, in sickness as well as Eternally.

David & Jonathan

That is your opinion and that is fine. As it is not supported by scripture it is nothing more than your opinion and i couldn’t care less…

FoJC_Forever

You can pretend to be a Christian until you die, and you will fool people. You are a child of the Devil, and you will suffer in this life as well as the next life for your blasphemy and false teaching. Yes, the Scriptures are clear about your kind and the deception you propagate in the world. You provoke others with your wretched twisting on the Scriptures just your father, the Devil.

I know you’ve been stalking me for quite some time. You have wasted your time and continue to solidify your heart in Darkness. I will never follow your kind to Hell, no matter how many Scriptures you twist and people you get to harass me.

People will read your words and think you actually love Jesus (the) Christ, but only those who don’t know Him, nor want to know Him will be fooled. You are are doomed along with those you fool.

Your Judgement is coming.

David & Jonathan

Stalking you? you give yourself to much credit sweetheart.

Again, it is only your opinion and that doesn’t count for much. You are free to have your opinion. You voice yours, I voice mine.

Judgement is coming for everyone. I have my sins to answer for. Me loving my husband not being one of them. Because Jesus teached us how we will be judged: Because no bad fruit can come from a good tree, and no good fruit can come from a bad tree.

The fruits of my life surely do not include the baseless spreading of prejudiced opinions about people that are just different from me. That rotten fruit is yours.

And if you ask me, what’s even more shameful is that the moderation staff on this website (a CHRISTIAN website) tolerates this kind of blatant trolling and blasphemy. Charisma News is just as bad in letting this shame slide by.

FoJC_Forever

Clicks = $$$ and Disqus isn’t about Christian edification. They’re in it for the $$$ only.

The Disqus network is easily hacked, so if you continue to use it, I would highly recommend using a computer without sensitive files on it.

Jeff Jankowiak

Homosexuals are in no position to preach to normal people.

David & Jonathan

Nobody is in the position to infer that other people are less normal then others.

And as the bible is one of the most gay supportive books on this planet, I feel free to preach for sure…

David & Jonathan

And before you come up with Corinthians and Timothy:

These two verses again do not include homosexuality. That is a current day translation that only proves the prejudice of the translator.

First of all, Paul didn’t write the letter in English. He wrote the letter in Greek. And the word you are referring to is the word Arsenokoites, which literally translated “man bed”, with the word bed in a sexual connotation. As this word was never used before, there is no clear understanding of what it actually means. Current day greek dictionaries explain it as meaning masturbators.

It was the translators of the KJV that translated it for you into english. It is clear that they also didn’t understand what the word Arsenokoites means. If they thought it would mean homosexuals (current day word) they would have used the word Sodomite, as this word was already in use to describe homosexuals since 390 After Christ. Just as Paul would have used the word “paiderasste” if he wanted to refer to homosexuals. Instead the translators came with the vague translation “Abusers of themselves with mankind”.

As you are probably more familiar with the english version, lets have a look at what it says…

First of all, why do you assume that the people that are the “abusers of themselves” are male? That can not be deduced from the text. Secondly, the word “Mankind” is used to refer to the human species, which includes male and female.

And third of all, there is the word abuse, which points to something sexual without consent.

Basically, your english version can mean anything.

That you believe it to be about homosexuality is only proving your prejudice, as it is not supported by the text. Not in English, and certainly not in the original Greek.

So there is not a single point of evidence that Paul was referring to homosexuality.

Your interpretation, Is just the flavor of the day, with no more substantiation than past interpretations such as masturbators, male prostitutes (for women), rapists, etc.

Those verses are saying God condemns same sex sex aka homosexuality as sin. That is the truth. Take it or leave it as you will.

David & Jonathan

They do not.
You follow human construct, not God…

Paige Turner

He also didnt write the bible.

lee metzger

As one who attended 10th Presbyterian in Philadelphia when Phillip Ryken was pastor there, I found him to be a man who was nothing less than eminently fair and a man of impeccable integrity. I don’t believe her story one bit that he asked her to resign when he insists he did not. Gayness is a sin in the eyes of God, no matter what she and other students there say, and it always will be. Gays are men and women who in expressing attraction for someone of the same sex deny what biology and internal compulsion demand. They need to be guided back to a right and biblical understanding of who they are as a creation of God, meant and destined to emotionally and physically someone of the opposite sex. Nothing could be plainer in scripture. Nothing at all.

David & Jonathan

By now you should know that homosexuality has never been a sin. I have explained you before…
Bearing false witness against your neighbor made it to the famous ten.
So go and sin no more.

lee metzger

Homosexuality has always been a sin. What does sin mean? It means “missing the mark.” It has always been God’s design that marriage is to between a man and a woman. His Word declares it. The human body confirms it. The sin comes into the picture in that homosexuality is a denial of the “mark” that God set for His creations. The body was made, biologically, for male/female acts of love. Gays exchange that for fictitious fantasies which prove to be very deadly ones as that community well knows. Sorry D & K. bit it’s YOU that has to stop lying and bearing false witness, trying to sanitize a way of life that is anything but clean.

David & Jonathan

You are very wrong.
Sin means going against God’s laws and commandments. And it is very clear what God commanded: Love God and Love your neighbor.
Sin doesn’t mean doing something outside of your limits of understanding.
Homosexuality is not in contravention to those two commandments. Therefore it can not be a sin.
Secondly, Jesus himself gave us the exception to marriage. I refer to Matthew 19:11 and 12. You should know by now that born eunuchs are not castrates but still fully capable of procreation. (as confirmed by Roman Law and the Talmud, both the historical context of Jesus, references are available).
The biology of the human body does not exclude same sex relationships/sex. Far from it. As homosexuality is inborn, it is even the opposite: It is in the “nature” of the person. Even the male body is wired in such a way that a both parties can enjoy the act in such a way that they can climax without further “manual intervention”. Homosexuality is as much part of nature as heterosexuality is. That is also confirmed in nature itself, as there are many examples of same sex relationships in nature.
And you are also wrong with your so -called “fantasies”. Homosexual relationships are based on exactly the same things as heterosexual relationships. It is about love, attraction, commitment, etc.
You might have a different opinion, but it is only your opinion and not much more. It is not substantiated by science nor scripture.
Same sex sex is only a danger in combination with promiscuity. Committed, monogamous same sex relationships have exactly the same risks to attract STDs as heterosexual relationships: Close to zero. Therefore, my health is not at risk.
God created straight people and homosexual people. The reason is still unknown to human kind, although there are some good guesses. The fact that you don’t understand those reasons doesn’t make it unnatural or a sin. It only means that you don’t understand the reasons.
Nowhere in scripture you find any condemnation of a loving and caring same sex relationship. The bible even comes with five examples of homosexual relationships, without any condemnation at all.

lee metzger

The biology of the body certainly DOES exclude samesex relationships/sex. The Creator made the vagina and penis SPECIFICALLY for sexual contact, one with the other. The anus is simply not made for that, has far less protective skin, which just so happens to tear very easily, virtually guaranteeing the spread of disease into the body of the recipient if the other has stds, etc. If homosexuality was an inborn, biological trait, and meant to be, then surely the Creator would have also given compatible biology so they could reproduce themselves. That homosexuality is a choice is clear to all who are sound in mind, body and soul, because the fact is that ALL behavior is choice driven. Only a denialist would insist otherwise. And, the crowning point that it IS choice driven behavior, is the testimonies of multitudes of EX-gays which exist in this world, all lies and spin aside from a desperate, leftist crowd, almost psychotic in their desperation to prove one is irretrievably born that way. Biology doesn’t drive you to sex with multiple partners, sometimes numbering in the hundreds and even thousands. Biology doesn’t force you to put your member where it doesn’t belong. It’s choice all the way. Deny it all you want. You’re living a fantasy, a delusion, a Twilight Zone existence which God HImself never, ever had in mind for His world. That some insist otherwise has no credibility whatsoever. Many insist cigarettes will never harm their lungs, and that meth will never harm their bodies. Again, delusional fictions of people lost in sin and in clear rebellion against God’s foreordained design for us all. The result of normative gay sex speak for themselves. A sorry legacy if there ever was one. God’s design, on the other hand? One man/one woman together for life, faithful to each other alone. The result? NO WORRIES WHATSOEVER about acquiring any std, HIV included. You can choose to play roulette with your life. For me, I’ll take God’s design. To do otherwise is pure insanity.

David & Jonathan

The biology of the body does not exclude same sex relationships and sex. A man being penetrated can climax just because of that act without further manual stimulation. Homosexuality occurs frequently in nature, so homosexuality is as natural as you can get it. Just as an example (I can name thousands more). Male Giraffes have 95% of the times sex with other males. Sex with a female is the exception.
Maybe the reason why the creator has made people homosexual is to avoid reproduction. Has it ever occurred to you that homosexuality might be a method of population control? Or because God wants humanity to be about more than procreation only? Homosexuals are above average represented amongst arts, health care, politics and business. It might be beneficial for society if some of its members do not focus on procreation but invest time in society as a whole. Or maybe he just thinks that Gay people are too talented to be bothered by children.

That you believe homosexuality to be a choice is only your opinion, not supported by science, not supported by scripture. It is only evidence of your prejudice.
There is plenty of empirical, statistically very significant evidence available that homosexuality is not a choice. As Jesus confirms as well in Matthew 19:11 and 12.

There are no ex-homosexuals. There are some homosexuals that choose to repress their feelings. Very sad thing.

Your comment about hundreds and thousands of sex partners is another example of your prejudice. Homosexuality and promiscuity are two very separate things. A minority of homosexuals might be promiscuous, just as a minority of heterosexual men enjoys visiting prostitutes. Every large city has its own red light district to proof that point. The majority of homosexuals have a sex life just as “boring” as the average straight man. Most homosexuals are in a monogamous relationships with exactly the same risk to attract a STD as the average heterosexual in a monogamous relationship: NONE. No Russian roulette at all.

Rereading your post I see lots of prejudice, lots of opinion, ZERO substantiation.

You live in a free country, and you have the right to have your opinion. I will fight for your right to have your opinion, even if that would cost me my life.

However, do not expect Gods blessing for your opinion, as he has clearly a different opinion, as reflected in the Holy Bible. You might want to read up on Romans 2.

I have the right to be happy with my husband, being able to care for him in all the same ways as you want to take care of your wife. That right, given to me by the constitution of my country, is a right I will fight for, even if that would cost me my life. Would you do the same for my right as I would do for yours?

lee metzger

“Homosexuality occurs frequently in nature, so homosexuality is as natural as you can get it.” Okay, so it’s natural since animals do it, is that correct? Using that logic, it would then be perfectly okay for me to eat my children once they’re born, kill anyone who invades my territory, and stalk and kill the weak simply because they are weak and old. After all, if animals do it, then it must be okay, right? Here’s the bottom line, and then I’m done with you. God created the universe. God designed and created our biology. He created woman and man with compatible biology to not just procreate the race, but to enjoy glorious euphoria in the sexual act as well. Scripture doesn’t just let it go there, however. It portrays this sexual union as a picture of the intimacy and love that Christ has for His church. Homosexual sex cannot picture that union. At best, it is a knockoff version of heterosexual sex, and at its root it is rebellion against the natural order and use of the body that God clearly created for us to enjoy. I’m really not interested in your defenses of homosexuality, because not only does scripture condemn it, but all reason and natural inclination condemn it as well. You’re going to do what you’re going to do anyway, but don’t bring God into the picture. Even if you insist on continuing to do so, you’ll only fool the ignorant. Anyone trained in the scriptures, and who are well-versed in them will not be deceived. Jesus is the answer for all that ails the human race, and he’s the answer for you as well. He’d say to you, as He said to the adulterous woman. “Go and sin no more.”

Still Seeking

There are zero examples of the bible condoning any homosexual relationship. That would be slander, David and Jonathan. If the relationship between the biblical David and Jonathan was in no need of condemnation, that would imply that there was no such homosexual activity between the two. You also see that David, when confronted with his sin, repented; he did not say “Well, Uriah was treating Bathsheba as a possession, or his pretty little idol or status symbol. In fact, he would not even meet her needs when he had the opportunity. Such a man does not deserve to live.” I think that God is more angry with us when we deny our sins.

David & Jonathan

Why would a homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan need any condemnation?

There is no verse in the OT and the NT that condemns homosexuality at all. You are guilty of circle reasoning.

There is no reason why David and Jonathan could not have had a homosexual relationship.

Still Seeking

There is one reason: they didn’t. However, if you insist in your slanderous assumption, even though David was a man after God’s own heart, he committed many sins. That does bring us hope in that we can love God, fall from His grace, but when we repent in sincerity and grief, He is quick to forgive and restore our relationship with Himself.

David & Jonathan

David and Jonathan had a bisexual relationship, and nowhere in the bible you can find it to be a sin. So no slander here, and no need for David to repent for his relationship with Jonathan. That David had many sins, just as all of us is something different.

The relationship between David and Jonathan…

1 samuel 18: And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.

2 And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father’s house.

3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.

4 And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.

The arguments regarding verse 1, 3 and 4 are quite self explaining.

Now lets look at verse 2 and compare it with your Genesis 2:24

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mothers house, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh

Exactly the same wording. This is how it was called in those days. If you got married, the man would leave the house of his father to live with his wive (or husband in this case). We are seeing a marriage alike bonding here.

That is confirmed later by Saul in verse 21 (after Saul has offered Merab his daughter to David as well):

21 And Saul said, I will give him her, that she may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him. Wherefore Saul said to David, Thou shalt this day be my son in law in the twain.

The above is the literal translation of the original text. Modern translations have added “one in the” before “in the twain” because the translators were to uncomfortable with the original. A typical example of prejudice of translators.

What does it say? David is married twice to a child of Saul.

And then move to 1 Samuel 20:

30 Then Saul’s anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother’s nakedness?

We know from leviticus 18 already that nakedness refers to sexual relationships.

What saul is saying is that Jonathan is parading himself publicly in a way that is like that of a woman who is searching for a male lover. He doesn’t compare Jonathans nakedness with a man’s nakedness but with the shame of a woman. Jonathan was not only called a woman by Saul, but also a whore, the maximum insult he could make.

And then we come to verse 20:41-42:

And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of the place toward the south, and fell on his face on the ground, and bowed himself three times, and they kissed one another, and wept one another, until David EXCEEDED.

The original hebrew word is GADAL, which means to become large. Basically the text says, they kissed another and David became large.

And then finally II Samuel 1:26

I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan, very pleasant hast thou been unto me, thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of woman.

First of all, there was not such a thing as platonic love of woman at that time. Basically you can read this as “your love for me was wonderful, and better than the sex with woman”.

The above doesn’t mean that David was 100% homosexual. It was a typical male-male relationship as we also have seen in Rome. The men having sex with each other, besides having a normal marriage for creating a linage…

David and Jonathan were bi-sexual lovers.

Still Seeking

We all need to be careful in what we may be tempted to read into scripture as when something which is so deeply a part of us we tend to search for affirmation where there is none. The true affirmation for which you seek is only found in the One who has redeemed you. Jonathan saw in David something that he wanted for himself: David’s courage and great love for God. That is what knit their souls, as David, like all the angels in Heaven rejoice when a newcomer enters the Kingdom, realized that he had found a brother whose heart wished only to be in tune with the heart of God.
That is what the scripture passages you have mentioned above are revealing
Wherever your relationship with God is, He understands you better than you understand yourself. We cannot talk ourselves out of our sins with Him, but we can repent of them. That is where true healing can and will begin. That is between you and God; let Him carry that burden for you as you work it out together.

David & Jonathan

That all might be your opinion, but can not be found in the text. It is your opinion. Exactly as you say: you are tempted to read this into scripture. But it is not there.

I have many sins, as all people have. But loving my husband is not one of them. Homosexuality has never been a sin. Not in the OT, and not in the NT.

Still Seeking

It is never a sin to love anyone, but God has only ordained such intimate relationships as sexual intercourse between one man and one woman in marriage. It may be pride that is coming between you and God; that wall can be broken down only through repentance.

David & Jonathan

I fully agree that loving somebody can never be a sin.

Jesus himself gave the exception to that rule in Matthew 19: 11 and 12, at the same time confirming that homosexuals are born that way from the mothers womb.

Jesus gave us two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. On these commandments depend all other laws and prophets. If something doesn’t violate these two commandments, it isn’t a sin. Homosexuality doesn’t violate the two commandments, as nobody gets hurt and because it doesn’t go against the love of God. Conclusion, homosexuality can not be a sin.

Still Seeking

There is much deeper reasoning than what you have proclaimed. Normalizing homosexual relationships, like normalizing any kind of sin seeps from individuals, through the family and all society and leads to destruction. That would not be loving God or your neighbor. If you love God, you want to obey Him as you know his plan is what is best for you and your neighbor. Love goes much deeper than allowing us to do whatever we feel is best for ourselves. It is sacrificial.

David & Jonathan

That is a classic example of circle reasoning: Because something is a sin, it seeps into society and destroys society, which is agains love your neighbor and therefore a sin.

First of all, homosexuality has proven to be very advantageous for society. It assists in a more controlled growth of population. Secondly, homosexuals are not “bothered” by children which gives them more time to contribute to society, which they do as they are above average represented in arts, politics, voluntary work, and caring professions, while also above average successful in business. The great historic thinkers, including the ones that brought us democracy, were homosexuals. The man that single handedly shortened the 2nd world war with 2 years, saving approx. 15 million lives, was a known homosexual.

Homosexuality was very normal in Rome till 390 After Christ, and still Rome was the ruler over Europe for hundreds of years, proving that a society with normalized homosexuality can be very successful. It was only after the Roman Catholic Church came into power, and homosexuality was forbidden, that the Roman empire collapsed. (376 AC). Such a coincidence…

The same patters is visible in current day. Cities/countries with liberal attitudes towards homosexual are significantly better performing economically.

And as homosexuality is inborn, just as heterosexuality, there is zero chance of “contagion”, so I fail to see how a whole society can be destroyed.

Your circle reasoning fails, because homosexuality is very positive for society, and has never been a sin to begin with.

Still Seeking

What I hear you saying is that because a homosexual person is able to contribute to society, that not only excuses his homosexual behavior, but is a contributing asset towards it?

“Homosexuality helps control population growth”? So now “being fruitful and multiplying” is meaningless? Our future generations are laid aside so we can concentrate on our own interests?
“Performing better economically” is the prime reason for which we are created?

Classifying yourself as one who is proud to be acting out his homosexual tendencies is quite different than classifying yourself as one who is struggling with an issue that is threatening your wholeness.

All sin is contagious. When we are able to recognize it in ourselves, it opens the door for us to come to Jesus for the cure.

DrewTwoFish

What if you’re intersexed? Golly, it’s hard to to know what direction to turn without sinning.

lee metzger

Having a birth defect, and putting your “member” where it doesn’t belong are two very different things, I’m sure you get that….

DrewTwoFish

But if your “member” doesn’t fit in the usual black and white binary where does that leave you? What has your god got for those who live in the grey?

lee metzger

Where does that leave you? That’s between you and your doctor. Much of the medical community doesn’t even agree on who is and who isn’t intersex.

Tiger

Just to give you a heads up: As president of Wheaton College, Ryken gave his approval to an official gay group for students, to provide them a “safe space.” Other evangelical colleges have followed suit. Wheaton and many other “Christian” colleges have cut themselves loose from the Bible.

David & Jonathan

If you read the bible carefully, you will see that they actually found the path back to the bible its teachings….

Mark0H

Hogwash. Homosexuals know nothing about religion.

lee metzger

They worship one thing only. Their bodies, and anal sex is the high, holy sacrament of the young, gay male. It’s also the reason tens of thousands of them have died since the Aids epidemic began in the early 80’s. You can’t make fools see who refuse to be guided by the truth. You can’t impose light on those who insist on walking in darkness. Only God can open their hearts to see the utter depravity of this wickedness from the satanic underworld. Thank HIM that so many of them have and now are very happy in a heterosexual relationship as they were originally designed for.

darh477

They have nothing but sex. They are unable to commit emotionally or feel any form of love that is not sexual. Emotionally, they are retarded.

lee metzger

Totally true actually. They’re not in it for love, but simply for “getting some.” And in their case, that involves hundreds and even thousands of sex partners throughout their lives. As an aside, hardly a recipe for marriage….

David & Jonathan

Hahahaha, tell that to the priests in the Roman Catholic Church. Approx 50% is Gay. They know much more about their religion then you know about yours.

Paige Turner

Totally wrong.

Its 95%

5% are lying

David & Jonathan

Hahahahaha, could very much be…
And I bet they are transsexual as well, wearing dresses all day…

Paige Turner

And lovely hats too.

Paige Turner

Theres a lot of Gays in the clergy.

localhistorywriter

Plenty of clergy in hell too.

Paige Turner

Really? Have you seen them?

Quantz

Oh, you’ve been?

Reason2012

Adults continue to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even after decades of believing the lie they were “born that way”, proving it’s not genetic, but the product of indoctrination, confusion, mental instability and/or abuse.

Homosexual behavior is most literally pointed out as a sin, and God has not changed on that regard. But if a person has those inclinations but does not act upon them, does not dwell in lust upon others, but is instead struggling against them to avoid them, then it’s not a sin. It’s just like sinful inclinations of any kind: it’s acting upon it when it becomes a sin.

And this is what God says about sin and specifically the behavior of homosexuality:

Romans 1:26-27 ”For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: (27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their_lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ”Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [men who willingly take on the part of a “woman” with another man], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [s odomites], (10) Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

1 Timothy 1:9-10 ”Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For_whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind [s odomites], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

Jude 1:7 ”Even as_Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

Luke 17:29 ”[Jesus said] But the same day that Lot went out of_Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.”

Matthew 19:4-6 ”And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Jesus made it quite clear God made us male and female so that a man will leave his father and mother (not two fathers, not three mothers and so on) and cleave onto his wife (not his husband and so on).

The Word of God rebukes us all – even if we all try to say we don’t believe the Bible, the very Word of God will be our judge when we face Him. And God is a righteous judge and will judge us all – not turn a blind eye to our sin. Do not be deceived by the world: it’s God we will have to convince that His word was a lie, not men. What happened in Noah’s day when the entire world rejected God? Did God spare them because there were so many? No – they all perished except for Noah and his family!

Proverbs 9:10 ”The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

God spared not His chosen people – we are kidding ourselves if we think He will spare the United States of America if we choose to blatantly turn away from Him.

Jeremiah 12:17 ”But if they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up and destroy that nation, saith the LORD.”

Luke 17:28-30 “So also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; (29) but the day Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from the heaven and destroyed them all. (30) Even so it shall be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”

Romans 1:18-32 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold [suppress] the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, m urder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

The entire Bible points out men having_sex with men is an abomination. Likewise woman having_sex with women. It’s not just Paul that pointed it out.

Genesis 19:4-13 “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of S odom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them [men wanting to have_sex with men].

And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing [he offers his daughters to be_raped to keep them from having_sex with another man – shows_rape is not the issue but male on male_sex]; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.”

These two messengers were sent to destroy that place before the event where they tried to_rape these messengers.

Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination …”

Even cross-dressing is an abomination:

Deuteronomy 22:5 “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

Deuteronomy 23:17 “There shall be no_whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a s odomite of the sons of Israel.”

1 Kings 22:46 “And the remnant of the s odomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.”

1 Kings 15:11-12 “And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the s odomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.”

2 Kings 23:7 “And he brake down the houses of the s odomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.”

Ezekiel 16:49-50 “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister S odom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

And the “pride” parades about homosexuality are more of the same.

Matthew 19:4-5 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”

Not father and father. Not mother and mother. Not his husband.

And only two people of opposite gender can become “one flesh”.

Live forever, people – not temporarily only to be cast out for living for the things of this world.

Amen! Keep pushing back against the gates of Hell, in spreading the truth of God’ Word!

David & Jonathan

Sorry dude, you can repeat the words but you clearly do not understand them:

Explain to me one thing. In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that a having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT. What is the context of both Leviticus 18 and 20? Molek worshipping. The first verses of Leviticus 20 start with a whole story about Molek worshipping, and the verse about perceived homosexuality in Leviticus 18 is followed by one about Molek worshipping. Another clear indication about context is the use of the word Toevah in the hebrew text (semi translated to abomination in your bible). Toevah is only used in an idolatrous context. A bit of explanation on Molek worshipping: it was all about fertility rites. Temple prostitution and sex orgies where men and women had sex with everything on 2 and 4 legs. Molek worshipping -> Idolatry.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

And just as having sex with a woman during her period outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 is not a sin, is sex between two man outside the context of Leviticus 18 and 20 not a sin. Simply because it is not a violation of the two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Obviously is Molek worshipping against the commandment Love God. Other sexual sins in Leviticus 18 and 20 are also outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 sinful as they are a violation of the Love your Neighbor commandment. But again, homosexuality is not one of them.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

And lets have a close look at Romans 1 as well:

First of all, Romans 1 is only an introduction to Romans 2. Paul is nicely sweeping up his public to make his point in Romans 2:

2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

And why don’t you read the preceding verses?

Lets start with verse 23:

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Only then we come to your favorite part…

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did EXCHANGE THEIR natural use into that which is against THEIR nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving THEIR natural use of the woman, BURNED in their lust one toward another;

Within the context of idolatry we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs. What needs to happen for you yourself as a straight man to burn in lust for another man? That is quite something don’t you think?

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

Not applicable…

And regarding Corinthians and Timothy:

These two verses again do not include homosexuality. That is a current day translation that only proves the prejudice of the translator.

First of all, Paul didn’t write the letter in English. He wrote the letter in Greek. And the word you are referring to is the word Arsenokoites, which literally translated “man bed”, with the word bed in a sexual connotation. As this word was never used before, there is no clear understanding of what it actually means. Current day greek dictionaries explain it as meaning masturbators.

It was the translators of the KJV that translated it for you into english. It is clear that they also didn’t understand what the word Arsenokoites means. If they thought it would mean homosexuals (current day word) they would have used the word Sodomite, as this word was already in use to describe homosexuals since 390 After Christ. Just as Paul would have used the word “paiderasste” if he wanted to refer to homosexuals. Instead the translators came with the vague translation “Abusers of themselves with mankind”.

As you are probably more familiar with the english version, lets have a look at what it says…

First of all, why do you assume that the people that are the “abusers of themselves” are male? That can not be deduced from the text. Secondly, the word “Mankind” is used to refer to the human species, which includes male and female.

And third of all, there is the word abuse, which points to something sexual without consent.

Basically, your english version can mean anything.

That you believe it to be about homosexuality is only proving your prejudice, as it is not supported by the text. Not in English, and certainly not in the original Greek.

So there is not a single point of evidence that Paul was referring to homosexuality.

Your interpretation, Is just the flavor of the day, with no more substantiation than past interpretations such as masturbators, male prostitutes (for women), rapists, etc.

I assume you already know from reading your bible that S&G was never about homosexuality either.

On the other hand we have the love story of David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and …., the Roman Soldier and his boy toy, Jesus and his “beloved disciple” that ran away naked at Jesus his arrest, we have Jesus confirming that homosexuals are born gay from the mothers womb, we have Isaiah saying that there is a bigger monument for gay people in heaven than having children, etc.

We have Jesus explaining that Loving God and Loving your neighbor are the two commandments where all other laws and commandments rest upon, meaning, if something doesn’t violate these two commandments, it can not be a sin. Homosexuality is not in contravention to these two commandments, therefore not a sin.

Jesus also explained to us that we can expect to be judged righteously. He even explained how: Because no good tree brings bad fruit, and no bad tree brings good fruit. If a relationship brings good to the participants and the people in their environment (good fruit), than the relationship (the tree) can not be bad.

However, the old testament is very clear about bearing false witness against your neighbor. that one made it to the famous ten AND is in contravention of the two foundational commandments.

So repent, go and sin no more…

Reason2012

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT.

Of course we need to look at context. There’s NO context where men having_sex with men is anything less than an abomination according to God, which is where your attempt to rationalize it falls apart.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

You have yet to show that God is ok with men having sex to men – so your attemp to to cliam it’s just about “Molek worshipping” is false.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

There’s only “one way” to “know” what homosexuality is: men having sex with another man instead of a woman. Your conclusion is only your opinion and God’s Word shows otherwise everywhere in the Bible – numerous verses – not just Leviticus 18 and 20, and is re-iterated in the NT as well.

Romans 2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself…

But the only point here is you’re igbnoring that he does point out that homosexual behavior is still an abomination to God. Why dont’ you go back and read chapter 1 that goes into detail about how homosexual behavior is still a sin.

Within the context of idolatry we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs.

False. God is pointing out a case where He gives people up to homosexuality who have in turn given him up. He’s not condemning homosexual behavior only in those who give him up.

Secondly, if homosexual behavior is supposedly just fine with God, whaet’s so “bad” about being “given up to it”, which also contradicts and exposes your attempt to change what God has made clear.

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

False. Romans 1 shows us that homosexuality is a sin God will give people up to that give him up.

These two verses again do not include homosexuality. That is a current day translation that only proves the prejudice of the translator.

The Greek words prove otherwise.

“…For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”
1 Timothy 1:10

The phrase “them that defile themselves with mankind” was translated from the Greek word arsenokoitēs, which means sodomite. This Greek word is also used in 1 Corinthians 6:9

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,…”
1 Corinthians 6:9

“abusers of themselves with mankind” is also translated from the same Greek word arsenokoitēs, which means sodomites.

Basically, your english version can mean anything.

The Greek words show us it does in fact mean sodomite.

On the other hand we have the love story of David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and ….,

Saying their friendship was a homosexual sex relationship instead is false. Prove it’s about homosexual_sex.

It’s as nasty as others trying to say Jesus was ‘homosexual’ and only shows how low the perversion activists will go with their lies in their attempt to convince others God is just fine with homosexual behavior.

We have Jesus explaining that Loving God and Loving your neighbor are the two commandments where all other laws and commandments rest upon, meaning, if something doesn’t violate these two commandments, it can not be a sin.

Using your logic, having sex with an animal doesn’t hurt anyone, shows love for even animals, and hence is ok by God.

No, as much as you hater this truth, God has standards of behavior we must follow, and men not having sex with other men is clearly one of them.

Jesus pointed out that marriage is between one man and one woman:

Matthew 19:4-6 “And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Jesus even points out that for the cause of making them male and female, this is why male will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.

Mark 10:5-7 “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (6) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;”

Jesus said God made them male and female – not male and male – not female and female.

Jesus said man shall leave father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother.

Jesus said man shall cleave to his wife, not to his husband, not to her wife.

1 Corinthians 7:2 “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

If a relationship brings good to the participants and the people in their environment (good fruit), than the relationship (the tree) can not be bad.

Except Jesus already made clear the only sort of sexual relationship (marriage) that exists is a man with a woman.

However, the old testament is very clear about bearing false witness against your neighbor. that one made it to the famous ten AND is in contravention of the two foundational commandments.

And herein is your dishonesty exposed completely.

To say that I’m bearing false witness, that would require (1) the person to say something that IS false and that (2) they KNOW is false.

(1) You have yet to show what God says IS false that homosexuality is not a sin, and hence you can’t then show

(2) “well then you also KNEW it was false, which makes it bearing false witness” instead of just being wrong but thinking it was the truth.

So you are in fact bearing false witness about me: claiming it IS false that homosexual behavior is a sin (it’s not false – it’s true that it’s a sin) and then pretending I “knew” homosexuality is not a sin and hence that I was supposedly being dishonest.

Your attempt to judge me in a way that’s obviously false only shows everyone else how dishonesty is all you’re bringing to the table here.

“[Jesus said] Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”
Matthew 7:1-2

It doesn’t matter what I believe on the topic. God makes it beyond clear homosexual behavior is an abomination to Him, that He can give people up to such sin that give Him up, and what I or anyone believes on the matter is completely irrelevant. It’s God we’ll have to convince, not men, that God was ok with men having sex with another man.

You have only to ask yourself how that’s going to go.

Thank you for posting.

DrewTwoFish

“Adults continue to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even after
decades of believing the lie they were “born that way”, proving it’s not
genetic, but the product of indoctrination, confusion, mental
instability and/or abuse.”

Uh, no. That doesn’t prove that it is or isn’t genetic at all. All that says is that people are capable of behavioural change.

Reason2012

Homosexual activists seem to hate those who overcome homosexuality. So how does it hurt them that others have turned away from it? Why do they hate them so much?

Is it because if there are any that DO turn away from it it proves it’s not genetic (which is does) and hence they have less of an excuse to remain stuck in it?

Is it because it ruins the talking point that it’s supposedly genetic and hence demands legal enforcement of societal acceptance?

And how does it factor in that it IS genetic fact that a person is a male or female, but if a person instead claims to FEEL like they’re the opposite, then genetic fact is thrown out the window as FEELINGS are the supposed REAL truth? So what if someone doesn’t FEEL like they want those attractions anymore?

So of course when this blatant dishonest hypocrisy is exposed, they’ll try to say “well if he doesn’t want to ACT on being a homosexual that doesn’t mean he’s not one”. But that’s more hypocrisy: Apply that logic to transgenders: So if a transgender doesn’t want to act like a male anymore because he FEELS like he’s a female, does that mean that’s also a lie as well and he’s really still a male only acting like a female? Of course not! Now they’ll instead call you a bigot for even daring suggest he’s still a male.

And given the fact that both activist groups attempt to lay claim to Matthew 19:12’s definition of eunuch applying to them, you’ve got a WHOLE lot of irony going on!

DrewTwoFish

Um….wow. Feel better?

Paige Turner

So why are there so many of them? Many grew up in religious households too.

Reason2012

Google homosexual kindergarten – google boy scouts – read up on how they’re indoctrinating kids when they’re at as young an age as possible.

Paige Turner

I thought it was only Christians that indoctrinated people. You can convert Christians and many have.

You cannot make people gay just like you cannot make someone left handed or blue eyed. How ridiculous and silly to even think that you can.

Reason2012

Expose kids at a younger and younger age to things, they most certainly are affected by it. Even at an age where they’ll have no recollection of it. Homosexual activists know this – it’s why they try to get hold of everyone else’s 5 year old kids and grandkids in kindergarten.

Adults continue on their own to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even some of the most die-hard homosexual activists -google ex-gay to read all about their testimonies or hear them say it. It shows it comes about by indoctrination, confusion, mental instability and/or abuse.

Why do you hate ex-gays so much? Why can’t you let then be happy turning away from it rather than insisting it’s genetic if they feel that way? Do feelings trump genetics when it’s transgenderism, but genetics trump feelings when it’s homosexuality? Why the double standard?

Paige Turner

You are yet to show any evidence or proof of the existence of ex-gay people.

They don’t exist. People not having gay sex is not ex-gay. This is why Exodus and JONAH have shut down. Its a scam and is dangerous.

Please show me one piece of evidence where a child has been “indoctrinated”. You are trying to conflate pedophilia with homosexuality. Most pedophiles are heterosexuals.

No proof, no science, no evidence. Very much like religion where you have to suspend your critical thinking in order to believe nonsense.

Paige Turner

Thats not very nice.

Why are there so many more homosexuals now than ever before?

Reason2012

We can’t avoid speaking the truth just because some claim it’s not nice.

They’re recruiting more than ever before: google homosexual kindergarten to see how they’re now going into schools and exposing everyone else’s kids and grandkids to images and ideas of homosexuality.

Paige Turner

Christians recruit. Gays have brunch.

You cannot make someone Gay. How utterly ridiculous. Please show me an example to prove me wrong.

Carlos IMG

Good question. They’ve been killing each other with AIDS and other diseases for 30 years. Weird, they scapegoat Christians, and yet their biggest problem is gays killing gays. Strange worldview, isn’t it?

Paige Turner

No, whats strange is that you believe garbage like that and you call yourself a Christian.

Hypocrite is more appropriate.

Jeff Jankowiak

Gays don’t give each other AIDS?

Hmm.

Can you back that up? Any links, miss?

David & Jonathan

This is what God says about homosexuality:

56 Thus saith the Lord, Keep ye judgment, and do justice: for my salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.

2 Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.

3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, speak, saying, The Lord hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.

4 For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;

5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.

Reason2012

A “eunuch” is not a homosexual.

“For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
Matthew 19:12

Eunuch comes from the Greek word eunouchos, which means “a castrated person (such being employed in Oriental bed chambers); by extension an impotent or unmarried man; by implication a chamberlain (state officer)”

And even if someone tried to look only at the English above, it would claim people can
be made homosexual by other men, or someone who makes themselves a homosexual.

In the dramatic account that follows, a pastor in Florida describes his experience in dealing with a young homosexual:

“Pastor,” the young man in my office wept, “somebody’s got to help me! I can’t go on any longer.” He bent forward in the large platform chair. “Two years ago I was born again. I really love the Lord, but I still have a powerful lust for other men.”

We waited until he regained his composure.

“Before I was saved, I was a homosexual. Since then I haven’t committed that sin—but the desire is still in me, and I’m afraid I can’t keep it under control much longer. I went to my pastor for deliverance, but he says it’s impossible for a Christian to have a demon of homosexuality, and that I’ll just have to exercise discipline.”

He looked at me with distress gripping his face. “But discipline isn’t the answer! I know there’s a perverse spirit in my body. It is there! Deliverance is the only hope I have. Can you help me?” He began weeping again.

I waited until he had regained his composure. Then I explained, “I wish it were true that Christians were immune to demonic invasion. Unfortunately, our corruptible has not yet ‘put on incorruption,’ and our mortal has not yet ‘put on immortality,’ as it says in 1 Corinthians 15:54. Until that happens, our minds and bodies will still be vulnerable to the enemy. A demon can go anywhere that sin and disease can go. If a Christian can have either of these, he’s also subject to having a demon.”

He listened intently.

“Receiving ministry today obligates you to a series of follow-up appointments in the future. This is not a one-time session. Jesus warned that when the unclean spirit leaves a person, it goes through dry places seeking rest and finds none. Ultimately it will return to the same person and try to gain reentry. If it succeeds, that person’s final condition will be worse than before. You absolutely must guard against that happening . To prevent it, you have to maintain a life of devotion to God, fellowship with other Spirit-filled believers, and sincerely read your Bible. Doing that will strengthen your relationship with the Lord.”

He agreed.

“I want you to lean back in the chair and listen carefully to what I say,” I went on. “If you comply with God’s terms, you will be set free. The Scripture promises that whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be delivered. That promise cannot fail. God will fulfill His covenant word to you. Just be certain you’re in perfect submission to Him.”

Then I led the young man in a proclamation renouncing every occult, unclean activity in which he had ever been involved. Then he verbally forgave everyone who had ever harmed him, including the men who had abused him sexually in childhood.

“Forgiving them does not mean you agree with what they did,” I explained. “It simply means that through forgiveness you cut the ropes that keep you tied to the injury they brought into your life.

“It’s important that you understand I will be speaking directly to the spirit,” I continued, “and not to you . You must listen carefully, but stay out of the way. Don’t allow the demon’s threats to intimidate you, and don’t protect it.”

He leaned back, eyes closed, as we began.

In a quiet but authoritative voice, I started quoting Scriptures to the spirit. I chose verses reminding it of Satan’s failure and Jesus’ victory. For example: “Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, [Jesus] Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Hebrews 2:14–15).

I reminded the spirit that it was as powerless to hinder the success of this ministry as it had been to stop the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

“And these signs will follow those who believe,” I told the demon, quoting Mark 16:17, “for Jesus said, ‘In My name they will cast out demons.’ ” And again, “‘I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you’ ” (Luke 10:19).

For about twenty minutes I continued quoting Scripture.

“The weapons of our warfare are not carnal ,” I went on, quoting 2 Corinthians 10: 4–5, “but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God…”

Several times the young man smiled at me with a seductive, sexy grin. Recognizing that this was merely a manifestation of the spirit, I continued. Suddenly, when I quoted Romans 16:20, “The God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly,” something amazing happened. The young man twisted sideways in the chair, grabbed the arm with both hands and went into a violent, epileptic-like seizure. His body lurched forward in a furious, hammering fashion, vibrating sideways at the same time. I held him around the waist, giving him as much support as I could. It was ugly. Yes, demons are ugly.

The sound coming out of him was equally astonishing. A bellowing noise, like that of a wounded bull, roared from his body. The events of Philip’s preaching in Samaria immediately came to mind: “Unclean spirits, crying with a loud voice, came out of many who were possessed” (Acts 8:7); and Jesus’ delivering the afflicted child when “the spirit cried out, convulsed him greatly, and came out of him” (Mark 9:26).

The seizure lasted several minutes as I continued to rebuke the spirit, commanding it to be quiet and to go. Then, as suddenly as the seizure had begun, the young man collapsed back in the chair, physically and emotionally spent. The room became quiet. The spirit was gone.

Slowly, reverently, as in worship, the youth raised both arms over his head, weeping and laughing, “It’s gone! It’s gone! I felt it go. Praise God, I’m free! It’s gone!”

A moment later he rose from the chair, spending the next half hour walking through the offices, singing, laughing, shouting. “Thank You, Jesus! It’s gone! It’s gone! Thank You, Jesus!”

In that brief period of time, the tormented lifestyle of homosexuality ended. Only its memory would remain.

I had particular reason to rejoice with this young man. For nearly thirty years of traditional ministry, I had been unable to help people with such crushing problems. I had stood by helplessly and watched as church members were torn apart by situations that deliverance ministry could easily have solved. Some of them even died. That failure, common to most of us pastors, radically changed when I received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and learned about deliverance ministry. Thankfully this young man did not become another of my casualties. The truth had set him free.

I discussed in Chapter 9 the scriptural reasons for sexual sins opening doorways to demons. Any participation in sexual perversions directly opens a person up to the inflow of demons. Scripture is plain, the following things are sin: sex with the same sex, sex with animals, sex with anyone other than your spouse, sex with demons. Any sexual contact other than a marital partner, will almost always result in demonic infestation.

This is why God has given His people so many commands about sexual purity. It is for our protection from this source of demonic infestation. Rape and violent sexual assault, particularly in children, is a doorway that I have come across repeatedly in my medical practice. This results in the entrance of some of the strongest demons that I have ever met. Particularly powerful demons are those involved in sado-masochism. Incest within a family always leads to demonic infestation.

Use of pornography also opens the door to demons…

David & Jonathan

hahahaha and more nonsense…
Although I agree that rape and violent sexual assault, particularly in Children, are very bad and sins for sure as these acts do go against “love your neighbor”

TheKingOfRhye

I’ve done some pretty perverted things, and viewed a lot of pornography too….haven’t seen one demon yet! I should have like a whole team of demons following me around by now.

Homosexuality is a very powerful, evil spirit today. It is a total abomination to God and represents confusion of mind. Confusion is a Babylonian trait. In Jeremiah 50:2 the Lord says, “Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded.” To be confounded is to be confused. Of all the books of the Bible, the book of Jeremiah uses the word “confounded” more than any other. The people of Babylon were confounded or confused, and the same is true today. Later in history, Bel became known as the god Janus, the two-headed god whose symbol is a club which he uses to bash the heads of men. Being two-headed is being double-minded and, therefore, unstable (James 1:8).

Today, homosexuality has reared its ugly head more than at any time in history,
except perhaps in the days of decadent Rome. There is no way to compare the two eras because there are no statistics, but homosexuality in America and elsewhere in the world is more blatant and widespread than in the previous thousand years. Despite what the media or homosexual advocacy groups would have us believe, homosexuality is clearly a sin in God’s eyes.

Confusion is increasing today. In the last five years, I have received more cases of schizophrenia, manic depression, and mental/emotional problems than ever before.

Sexual perversion – Sexual perversion constitutes a very strong entry point for wicked spirit husbands and wives. Any sexual relationship that violates the word of God leads to an evil spiritual marriage. Fornication, adultery, incest, masturbation, lesbianism. homosexuality, bestiality, pornography and prostitution are avenues for getting into marriage with spirit husbands and wives.

This generation has seen the worst sexual perversion. If you read the daily, the paper’s increasing number of bizarre incidents of sexual perversion will shock you.

Some African ladies have become so demonic that they travel to far away Europe where they allow dogs and other animals sleep with them for a fee. Those who are involved in such horrific abominations will obviously get married to terrible wicked spirit husbands.

Ladies who give away their womanhood to demonic dogs would receive marriage invitations from multiple wicked spirits. If a man eventually sleeps with such ladies, he will be in trouble. The spirits that came into such a woman through sexual perversion (bestiality) will invade the life of the man.

“Iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens another.” And “Without consultation, plans are frustrated, But with many counselors they succeed.”
That being said I would appreciate your reading the dialogue between myself and “God hates Faith” regarding the kingdom of God.

He is making the assertion that Jesus was essentially a false prophet when he said that some of those present would not taste death until they see him coming in his kingdom, he’s making the second coming and the “kingdom of God” synonymous…basically saying that obviously all the apostles are dead and they never saw the kingdom come, which makes Jesus a liar/false prophet. Im trying to reason with him that the “kingdom of God is within you” and that the Church (Pentecost) is primarily what Christ was speaking of when he said they would still be alive to see the coming kingdom with power…I even pointed out how the Pharisees addressed Jesus asking him “show us the kingdom” and he replied that it was not observable…I think that I have provided sufficient scriptural proof that Jesus was not mistaken or a liar when he said they wouldn’t taste death until they saw the kingdom come…I was just curious what your thoughts were or if you would add anything.

In so many cases of friends of mine from the Craft, I watched this current do its awful work I have already mentioned the descent into blood rites, but additionally sexual perversity of the vilest sort enthralled many of them. I was not immune either.

Like a beetle which eats invisibly away at a piece of wood, the demonic powers unleashed by Wiccan initiations gnawed silently at whatever decency and sanity we possessed. Many of us became involved in sado-masochism and bondage and discipline. Hard-core pornography, promiscuity and adultery were taken
for granted.

Sodomy is especially “sacred” to Set because of its close association to human waste, and its mimicry of certain canine practices. This detestable practice serves a similar function in the anus as does the magical sex act of intercourse described above. It opens what are called the “Typhonion” tunnels, channels through which extremely powerful demons, like the horrible Choronzon, can travel from their “alternate reality” and emerge into this universe and enter the sex partner’s body.

This is what is called Qliphotic magic, representing the blackest side of Qabalism and the Tree of Life. The Qliphot (derived from the Hebrew for “harlot” or “shell”) is the “backside” of the qabalistic Tree of Life. The “backside” metaphor carries through, for the best way to open these tunnels of demonic ingress is through homosexual sex, in which approximate contact and stimulation is achieved with the prostate gland of the other.

As study of occult anatomical principles reveals that it is believed that a circuit of powerful energy runs from the anus to the roof of the mouth and tongue, down through the trunk and into the generative organs. Thus, it can be seen that most homosexual practices reinforce these demonic links. This does much to explain both the increasingly perverse and even dangerous practices of most homosexuals, and of most people who practice higher levels of Witchcraft.

This also explains the sudden meteoric rise of interest in the child as a sexual object, and the terrible seductiveness of child pornography. We often ask ourselves, “How could a person be sexually attracted to a small child?” It does not seem sane or normal, and of course it is not. Yet, throughout his life, Crowley attempted to invoke the Crowned and Conquering Child…

David & Jonathan

Homosexuality has never been a sin. That is a man made construct of 390 after christ. It was the Roman Catholic Church that wanted to win its battle against Arianism. The RC won at the council of Nicea, but the Arians got the upperhand again thanks to the influence of Eusebius of Nicomedia who was very close to the Roman Emperor Constantine. Eusebius, and many other Arians, were in trusted positions because they were homosexuals and therefore not a threat to the line of successions (often the keepers of Emperial harems). The RC ultimately won after the death of Constantine. To ensure the Arians would never rise again they invented the sin of homosexuality. That is when S&G became about homosexuality (even though no other reference to that story in the bible tells us that it is about homosexuality, and Judaism, the copyright holders to that story, say the same).

Lets have a close look at all the other so called “clobber passages” in the bible:

In good old leviticus 18 and 20 you find that having sex with a woman during her period is a grave sin resulting in expulsion from the people of Israel. The same “sin” is also mentioned in Leviticus 15:24 but now it is not a sin at all. It is only resulting in 7 days of uncleanliness (the same as the woman herself during her period, with or without sex). Quite a difference don’t you think? Please explain why…

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT. What is the context of both Leviticus 18 and 20? Molek worshipping. The first verses of Leviticus 20 start with a whole story about Molek worshipping, and the verse about perceived homosexuality in Leviticus 18 is followed by one about Molek worshipping. Another clear indication about context is the use of the word Toevah in the hebrew text (semi translated to abomination in your bible). Toevah is only used in an idolatrous context. A bit of explanation on Molek worshipping: it was all about fertility rites. Temple prostitution and sex orgies where men and women had sex with everything on 2 and 4 legs. Molek worshipping -> Idolatry.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

And just as having sex with a woman during her period outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 is not a sin, is sex between two man outside the context of Leviticus 18 and 20 not a sin. Simply because it is not a violation of the two constitutional commandments: Love God and Love your Neighbor. Obviously is Molek worshipping against the commandment Love God. Other sexual sins in Leviticus 18 and 20 are also outside the context of Lev 18 and 20 sinful as they are a violation of the Love your Neighbor commandment. But again, homosexuality is not one of them.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

And lets have a close look at Romans 1 as well:

First of all, Romans 1 is only an introduction to Romans 2. Paul is nicely sweeping up his public to make his point in Romans 2:

2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3 So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment? 4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

And why don’t you read the preceding verses?

Lets start with verse 23:

23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Only then we come to your favorite part…

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did EXCHANGE THEIR natural use into that which is against THEIR nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving THEIR natural use of the woman, BURNED in their lust one toward another;

Within the context of idolatry we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs. What needs to happen for you yourself as a straight man to burn in lust for another man? That is quite something don’t you think?

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

Not applicable…

And regarding Corinthians and Timothy:

These two verses again do not include homosexuality. That is a current day translation that only proves the prejudice of the translator.

First of all, Paul didn’t write the letter in English. He wrote the letter in Greek. And the word you are referring to is the word Arsenokoites, which literally translated “man bed”, with the word bed in a sexual connotation. As this word was never used before, there is no clear understanding of what it actually means. Current day greek dictionaries explain it as meaning masturbators.

It was the translators of the KJV that translated it for you into english. It is clear that they also didn’t understand what the word Arsenokoites means. If they thought it would mean homosexuals (current day word) they would have used the word Sodomite, as this word was already in use to describe homosexuals since 390 After Christ. Just as Paul would have used the word “paiderasste” if he wanted to refer to homosexuals. Instead the translators came with the vague translation “Abusers of themselves with mankind”.

As you are probably more familiar with the english version, lets have a look at what it says…

First of all, why do you assume that the people that are the “abusers of themselves” are male? That can not be deduced from the text. Secondly, the word “Mankind” is used to refer to the human species, which includes male and female.

And third of all, there is the word abuse, which points to something sexual without consent.

Basically, your english version can mean anything.

That you believe it to be about homosexuality is only proving your prejudice, as it is not supported by the text. Not in English, and certainly not in the original Greek.

So there is not a single point of evidence that Paul was referring to homosexuality.

Your interpretation, Is just the flavor of the day, with no more substantiation than past interpretations such as masturbators, male prostitutes (for women), rapists, etc.

I assume you already know from reading your bible that S&G was never about homosexuality either.

On the other hand we have the love story of David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and …., the Roman Soldier and his boy toy, Jesus and his “beloved disciple” that ran away naked at Jesus his arrest, we have Jesus confirming that homosexuals are born gay from the mothers womb, we have Isaiah saying that there is a bigger monument for gay people in heaven than having children, etc.

We have Jesus explaining that Loving God and Loving your neighbor are the two commandments where all other laws and commandments rest upon, meaning, if something doesn’t violate these two commandments, it can not be a sin. Homosexuality is not in contravention to these two commandments, therefore not a sin.

Jesus also explained to us that we can expect to be judged righteously. He even explained how: Because no good tree brings bad fruit, and no bad tree brings good fruit. If a relationship brings good to the participants and the people in their environment (good fruit), than the relationship (the tree) can not be bad.

However, the old testament is very clear about bearing false witness against your neighbor. that one made it to the famous ten AND is in contravention of the two foundational commandments.

So repent, go and sin no more…

Reason2012

The reason for the difference is CONTEXT.

Of course we need to look at context. There’s NO context where men having_sex with men is anything less than an abomination according to God, which is where your attempt to rationalize it falls apart.

I hope you agree with me that a current day same sex relationship has nothing to do with Molek worshipping.

You have yet to show that God is ok with men having sex to men – so your attemp to to cliam it’s just about “Molek worshipping” is false.

Conclusion, Leviticus 18 and 20 does not condemn homosexuality as we know it today.

There’s only “one way” to “know” what homosexuality is: men having sex with another man instead of a woman. Your conclusion is only your opinion and God’s Word shows otherwise everywhere in the Bible – numerous verses – not just Leviticus 18 and 20, and is re-iterated in the NT as well.

Romans 2 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself…

But the only point here is you’re igbnoring that he does point out that homosexual behavior is still an abomination to God. Why dont’ you go back and read chapter 1 that goes into detail about how homosexual behavior is still a sin.

Within the context of idolatry we are talking here about straight people, who as part of their pagan sex/fertility rituals had sex with everything on two and four legs.

False. God is pointing out a case where He gives people up to homosexuality who have in turn given him up. He’s not condemning homosexual behavior only in those who give him up.

Secondly, if homosexual behavior is supposedly just fine with God, whaet’s so “bad” about being “given up to it”, which also contradicts and exposes your attempt to change what God has made clear.

Romans 1 has nothing to do with homosexuality as in a loving and caring relationship. It is about Idolatry.

False. Romans 1 shows us that homosexuality is a sin God will give people up to that give him up.

These two verses again do not include homosexuality. That is a current day translation that only proves the prejudice of the translator.

The Greek words prove otherwise.

“…For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

1 Timothy 1:10

The phrase “them that defile themselves with mankind” was translated from the Greek word arsenokoite¯s, which means sodomite. This Greek word is also used in 1 Corinthians 6:9

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,…”

1 Corinthians 6:9

“abusers of themselves with mankind” is also translated from the same Greek word arsenokoite¯s, which means sodomites.

Basically, your english version can mean anything.

The Greek words show us it does in fact mean sodomite.

On the other hand we have the love story of David and Jonathan, Ruth and Naomi, Daniel and ….,

Saying their friendship was a homosexual sex relationship instead is false. Prove it’s about homosexual_sex.

It’s as nasty as others trying to say Jesus was ‘homosexual’ and only shows how low the perversion activists will go with their lies in their attempt to convince others God is just fine with homosexual behavior.

We have Jesus explaining that Loving God and Loving your neighbor are the two commandments where all other laws and commandments rest upon, meaning, if something doesn’t violate these two commandments, it can not be a sin.

Using your logic, having sex with an animal doesn’t hurt anyone, shows love for even animals, and hence is ok by God.

No, as much as you hater this truth, God has standards of behavior we must follow, and men not having sex with other men is clearly one of them.

Jesus pointed out that marriage is between one man and one woman:

Matthew 19:4-6 “And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Jesus even points out that for the cause of making them male and female, this is why male will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.

Mark 10:5-7 “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (6) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;”

Jesus said God made them male and female – not male and male – not female and female.

Jesus said man shall leave father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother.

Jesus said man shall cleave to his wife, not to his husband, not to her wife.

1 Corinthians 7:2 “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

If a relationship brings good to the participants and the people in their environment (good fruit), than the relationship (the tree) can not be bad.

Except Jesus already made clear the only sort of sexual relationship (marriage) that exists is a man with a woman.

Paige Turner

Thats too many words. Gay marriage will lead to Man/Lawnmower marriage. Where will the evil end?

Reason2012

To pretend men will marry lawnmowers only shows how you’re being dishonest.

People have already been now suggesting the “right” to marry a sibling or the “right” for multiple men and women to be called a marriage. To hide this fact that it leads to anything goes, you try to ridicule instead and pretend people are implying it will lead to people marrying dead objects. You have only to ask yourself why you need tor resort to such things.

Paige Turner

And it hasn’t happened. The supreme court has ruled. End of story.

Marriage is a contract and you have to be capable of being able to enter into a contract to marry.
This is why you cannot marry inanimate objects.
All these other “people” who are asking to do this is nonsense and is bearing false witness.

Marrying your cousin or brother/sister is a seperate legal discussion that has been dealt with already.

Gay Marriage leads to nothing more that happy gay married couples and there is no proof to the contrary.

Reason2012

Sure has happened – already a woman who wants to marry her father. Google it.

I wasn’t the one who brought up inanimate objects -a fellow perversion activist of yours did. Glad you get it.

Marrying your cousin or brother/sister is a seperate legal discussion that has been dealt with already.

So you’re against some forms of marriage while pretending to be about “marriage equality for all”? As I continue to point out: the hypocrisy of the homosexual activists for condemning others for doing precisely what they do.

Gay Marriage leads to nothing more that happy gay married couples and there is no proof to the contrary.

Kids raised in that environment point out facts to the contrary. Google it.

Paige Turner

As I said – it hasn’t happened and it wont.

Im not doing your research for you. Someone “wanting” something is not relevant and about as effective as prayer for getting anything done.

You provide zero evidence for anything and are too lazy to cite any references or provide any concrete evidence. “Google it” and “I said” is not proof or evidence.

None of the above things have happened. They are stories and nothing more – just like your bible. There are no facts in those stories. None. And None of them have come true and wont.

You need to stop living in lala land and realise that Marriage equality is the law of the land and impacts you in no way, shape or form. The rest of this is sabre rattling and bearing false witness.

Your name is also misleading. You have no reason and its not 2012. Time to live in the now – not the past.

Reason2012

Jesus pointed out that marriage is between one man and one woman:

Matthew 19:4-6 “And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

Jesus even points out that for the cause of making them male and female, this is why male will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.

Mark 10:5-7 “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (6) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;”

Jesus said God made them male and female – not male and male – not female and female.

Jesus said man shall leave father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother.

Jesus said man shall cleave to his wife, not to his husband, not to her wife.

1 Corinthians 7:2 “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

Not to mention Jesus is God, so the entire Word of God is the Words of Christ. As Jesus is The Word.

John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”

The Lord rebukes us for our attempts to destroy what He defined as one man and one woman.

It doesn’t work anymore to call any who do not agree with the attempts of activists to legally re-define morals as having a phobia or being a bigot – people are realizing those are the only hateful actions here.

In the dramatic account that follows, a pastor in Florida describes his experience in dealing with a young homosexual:

“Pastor,” the young man in my office wept, “somebody’s got to help me! I can’t go on any longer.” He bent forward in the large platform chair. “Two years ago I was born again. I really love the Lord, but I still have a powerful lust for other men.”

We waited until he regained his composure.

“Before I was saved, I was a homosexual. Since then I haven’t committed that sin—but the desire is still in me, and I’m afraid I can’t keep it under control much longer. I went to my pastor for deliverance, but he says it’s impossible for a Christian to have a demon of homosexuality, and that I’ll just have to exercise discipline.”

He looked at me with distress gripping his face. “But discipline isn’t the answer! I know there’s a perverse spirit in my body. It is there! Deliverance is the only hope I have. Can you help me?” He began weeping again.

I waited until he had regained his composure. Then I explained, “I wish it were true that Christians were immune to demonic invasion. Unfortunately, our corruptible has not yet ‘put on incorruption,’ and our mortal has not yet ‘put on immortality,’ as it says in 1 Corinthians 15:54. Until that happens, our minds and bodies will still be vulnerable to the enemy. A demon can go anywhere that sin and disease can go. If a Christian can have either of these, he’s also subject to having a demon.”

He listened intently.

“Receiving ministry today obligates you to a series of follow-up appointments in the future. This is not a one-time session. Jesus warned that when the unclean spirit leaves a person, it goes through dry places seeking rest and finds none. Ultimately it will return to the same person and try to gain reentry. If it succeeds, that person’s final condition will be worse than before. You absolutely must guard against that happening . To prevent it, you have to maintain a life of devotion to God, fellowship with other Spirit-filled believers, and sincerely read your Bible. Doing that will strengthen your relationship with the Lord.”

He agreed.

“I want you to lean back in the chair and listen carefully to what I say,” I went on. “If you comply with God’s terms, you will be set free. The Scripture promises that whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be delivered. That promise cannot fail. God will fulfill His covenant word to you. Just be certain you’re in perfect submission to Him.”

Then I led the young man in a proclamation renouncing every occult, unclean activity in which he had ever been involved. Then he verbally forgave everyone who had ever harmed him, including the men who had abused him sexually in childhood.

“Forgiving them does not mean you agree with what they did,” I explained. “It simply means that through forgiveness you cut the ropes that keep you tied to the injury they brought into your life.

“It’s important that you understand I will be speaking directly to the spirit,” I continued, “and not to you . You must listen carefully, but stay out of the way. Don’t allow the demon’s threats to intimidate you, and don’t protect it.”

He leaned back, eyes closed, as we began.

In a quiet but authoritative voice, I started quoting Scriptures to the spirit. I chose verses reminding it of Satan’s failure and Jesus’ victory. For example: “Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, [Jesus] Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Hebrews 2:14–15).

I reminded the spirit that it was as powerless to hinder the success of this ministry as it had been to stop the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

“And these signs will follow those who believe,” I told the demon, quoting Mark 16:17, “for Jesus said, ‘In My name they will cast out demons.’ ” And again, “‘I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you’ ” (Luke 10:19).

For about twenty minutes I continued quoting Scripture.

“The weapons of our warfare are not carnal ,” I went on, quoting 2 Corinthians 10: 4–5, “but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God…”

Several times the young man smiled at me with a seductive, sexy grin. Recognizing that this was merely a manifestation of the spirit, I continued. Suddenly, when I quoted Romans 16:20, “The God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly,” something amazing happened. The young man twisted sideways in the chair, grabbed the arm with both hands and went into a violent, epileptic-like seizure. His body lurched forward in a furious, hammering fashion, vibrating sideways at the same time. I held him around the waist, giving him as much support as I could. It was ugly. Yes, demons are ugly.

The sound coming out of him was equally astonishing. A bellowing noise, like that of a wounded bull, roared from his body. The events of Philip’s preaching in Samaria immediately came to mind: “Unclean spirits, crying with a loud voice, came out of many who were possessed” (Acts 8:7); and Jesus’ delivering the afflicted child when “the spirit cried out, convulsed him greatly, and came out of him” (Mark 9:26).

The seizure lasted several minutes as I continued to rebuke the spirit, commanding it to be quiet and to go. Then, as suddenly as the seizure had begun, the young man collapsed back in the chair, physically and emotionally spent. The room became quiet. The spirit was gone.

Slowly, reverently, as in worship, the youth raised both arms over his head, weeping and laughing, “It’s gone! It’s gone! I felt it go. Praise God, I’m free! It’s gone!”

A moment later he rose from the chair, spending the next half hour walking through the offices, singing, laughing, shouting. “Thank You, Jesus! It’s gone! It’s gone! Thank You, Jesus!”

In that brief period of time, the tormented lifestyle of homosexuality ended. Only its memory would remain.

I had particular reason to rejoice with this young man. For nearly thirty years of traditional ministry, I had been unable to help people with such crushing problems. I had stood by helplessly and watched as church members were torn apart by situations that deliverance ministry could easily have solved. Some of them even died. That failure, common to most of us pastors, radically changed when I received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and learned about deliverance ministry. Thankfully this young man did not become another of my casualties. The truth had set him free.

In so many cases of friends of mine from the Craft, I watched this current do its awful work I have already mentioned the descent into blood rites, but additionally sexual perversity of the vilest sort enthralled many of them. I was not immune either.

Like a beetle which eats invisibly away at a piece of wood, the demonic powers unleashed by Wiccan initiations gnawed silently at whatever decency and sanity we possessed. Many of us became involved in sado-masochism and bondage and discipline. Hard-core pornography, promiscuity and adultery were taken
for granted.

Sodomy is especially “sacred” to Set because of its close association to human waste, and its mimicry of certain canine practices. This detestable practice serves a similar function in the anus as does the magical sex act of intercourse described above. It opens what are called the “Typhonion” tunnels, channels through which extremely powerful demons, like the horrible Choronzon, can travel from their “alternate reality” and emerge into this universe and enter the sex partner’s body.

This is what is called Qliphotic magic, representing the blackest side of Qabalism and the Tree of Life. The Qliphot (derived from the Hebrew for “harlot” or “shell”) is the “backside” of the qabalistic Tree of Life. The “backside” metaphor carries through, for the best way to open these tunnels of demonic ingress is through homosexual sex, in which approximate contact and stimulation is achieved with the prostate gland of the other.

As study of occult anatomical principles reveals that it is believed that a circuit of powerful energy runs from the anus to the roof of the mouth and tongue, down through the trunk and into the generative organs. Thus, it can be seen that most homosexual practices reinforce these demonic links. This does much to explain both the increasingly perverse and even dangerous practices of most homosexuals, and of most people who practice higher levels of Witchcraft.

This also explains the sudden meteoric rise of interest in the child as a sexual object, and the terrible seductiveness of child pornography. We often ask ourselves, “How could a person be sexually attracted to a small child?” It does not seem sane or normal, and of course it is not. Yet, throughout his life, Crowley attempted to invoke the Crowned and Conquering Child…

Paige Turner

Great cut and paste. Thank you.

Paige Turner

Thanks for the upvote.

I guess I should read it now but there are lots of angry words that I don’t like.

I just thought that it looked neat and aligned given that it was cut and pasted from somewhere else without being referenced which I think is stealing and a breach of one of the 10 commandments if Im not mistaken.

I just wanted to answer your false charge that I was quoting a copyrighted work without giving them credit.

Have a good one 🙂

Paige Turner

I will. 🙂

And stop cutting and pasting. You need to come up with some original material. This isnt Trump University.

Seabeacon

lol

FoJC_Forever

If they are truly a Christian university, they shouldn’t seek her resignation, they should fire her for violating the Scripture and teaching false doctrine.

Those who buy into the convoluted teachings of homosexuals concerning the Scripture are simply pagans, as the Catholics are pagans pretending to be Christians. Some are trying to distance themselves from Catholics, but are actually under a different strand of demonic rule.

Homosexuals don’t need to be “healed” of their homosexuality, they need to be save and delivered by the power of the Holy Spirit. It is truly senseless to discuss Doctrine with these people, for they are blind and are still under the sway of the Devil. They, and their supporters, believe that the current acceptance of them worldwide is affirmation of them not being in Sin, but it’s actually the Delusion sent by God, because the the world has and is rejecting the Truth.

Rather than trying to parse languages and translations, those who know and follow Jesus (the) Christ are listening to the Holy Spirit and allowing Him to teach them the Scriptures. Getting caught up in the twisted teachings of people who claim to have knowledge of the Scripture will only open yourself up to doubt.

It is no coincidence that homosexuality in religion is walking hand in hand with the rise of feminine worship and submission in religious sects which claim to be Christian. Jezebel led a religious sect and her true nature was revealed in the book of Revelation. People who promote feminism in Christianity are being empowered and led by the same demonic hosts who are pushing the Lie that homosexuality is accepted, even created by God.

Beware false debates/discussions displayed by people who simply role on comment boards for show.

We were born into perilous times.

Judgement is coming.

Paige Turner

They should shoot her. Shes a blasphemer.

Ax2root

Wheaton weird.

Why spend private tuition money to attend what can be found at govt propoganda universities and colleges?

Carlos IMG

For the kids who like to drink and sleep around, there would be the allure of “forbidden fruit,” misbehaving at a Christian college. At a secular school, they’d just be one of the crowd. At a Christian school, they could cast themselves in the role of the Bad Boys, thumbing their noses at the repressive authorities.

Connect With Us:

Learn More

About Christian News Network

Christian News Network provides up-to-date news and information affecting the body of Christ worldwide from an uncompromising Biblical worldview. Our objective is to present the news with the word of God as our lens, and to bring to light what is hid in the darkness. Learn more →